The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1887-11-02


brought by plaintiff in the fall of 1885 TO
recover from the defendant all Of the
lands in Section 9, in Township II, North
of Range 8 West, for which he. had
lease from the Central Pacific Railroad
Company. The case was tried in the
First District Court at Ogden, by Judge
Boremdn, with jury, and judgment was
rendered for the plaintiff on the 26th of
October last. The following is the
Judges charge to the jury and copy
of the verdict:
| THE JUDGES CHARGE.
The jury are instructed, that they by
the act of Congress approved July, A.
D., 1862 and the amendatory act thereof
approved July ID, A. D.. 1864, there was
granted to the Central Pacific Railroad
Company of California, a corporation
organized under the laws of the State
of California, every alternate section OF
public lands designated by odd mum
bers, to the amount of ten alternate sec.
tons per mile on each side of its rail-
road. on the line thereof, from point
about five miles northwesterly from the
station at Ogden, Utah; thence westerly
| to the line between the States of Nevada
| and california, and within the limits or
| twenty miles on each SIDE of said road
! not sold, reserved or otherwise disposed
| of by the United States, aud to which a
| pre- empuOn, homestead, SWampland or
! other lawful claim had not attached at
| the time the line of said road was detin
| itely fixed; that said grant excepted all
mineral lands or lands returned and de-
nominated as such, the Improvements
of anv BONA fide settler, and all govern
ment reservations.
That the line of said road became
definitely fixed upon the fling of said
| corpOI alton with the Department Of the
| Interior, its map of definite location,
designating the general route OF said
70 d, and thereupOn the beneficial in
terest equivalent TO fee simple vested
| in the said corporation by relation back,
as of the date Of said acts IF Congress
You are further instructed. that it IS
established N this case by stipulation
of the parties, that the lands IN con
| trOversy here ere on subdivisions of an
odd alternate section, within the twenty
mile limit of the grant 10 said corpora
ton and that said company filed It's
map of definite location as aforesaid, IL
! the Department of the Interior, IN
! October, 1868.
You are instructed that unless, ct The
| time of the filing Of said map, the lands
in controversy had been sod, reserved
| or otherwise disposed OF by The United
States, or that some pre-empuoL, home
stead. swamp land o. otherIawful claim
! had attached thereto, or were
known mineral lands, or were
lands returned and denomina'ed
as such, or contained the i'm
provements of any bona dde settler
! they passed to and vested i'll the Central
| Pacifcs Railroad Company nj Califor ia,
and that said company became the
owner thereof from the dates Of said
acts OF Congress.
You are furtner instructed, that by
| the articles of association, amalgama-
ton ana consolidation, executed June
| 22d, 1870, between the Central PaClhc
| Railroad Company of California, and
| the Western Pacific Railroad Company,
and by the further ARTICLES OF assOCla-
tor, amalgamatiOn and consolidation
executed August 81, 1870, between the
Cent al Pacific Railroad Company and
certain other railroad companies
all the rights, title and interess
!; IN anu 70 all the lands granted orig
lnalIy by the acts of Congress of J uly l,
1862, and July 2. 1854 passed to and
vested in the Central Pacific Railroad
| Company; tnat thercupOn the said com
pany became the owner thereof: that
| or the Ease bearing date the ITO OF Au-
gust, 1885, Introduced in evidence as
pla ntif7s exhibit =. and mace by the
! Central Pacific Railroad Company TO
the plaintiff III this action, the said
company leased aud let for the term of
i've years, from the 1st day of Janu Try
1856, the lands mentioned i'll the COM
plant, and gave to bin the right Of the
immediate possession OF them unless
the same were within some OF the eX-
ceptionS contained III the grants, as
heretofore stated.
If you believe from the evidence that
none of the lands described III the com
plant aG the date OF the thing of the
map Of definite location, IT, VIII, October.
1868 we're known as mineral land, nor
had been returned and GenOminated as
such, nor were then reserved from sale,
and that no presumption, swamp lana
or other lawfnl claim had then attached
thereto, the plaintiff is entitled to the
possession thereof, and you will so 6rd.
If you believe from the evidence that
the Central Pacific Railroad Company,
the lessor of the plaintiff, did, on or
about November, 1885, pay to
the Surveyor-General and the
Register and Receiver of the
United States for this Territory
for the United Sta es, the cost of sur
veying, selecting and nveyipg por-
ZION of the lands described In the COM
plant, t wit: the northwest quarter OF
the northeast quarter and the north
west quarter of southwest quarter and
the northwest quarter Of Section 9, oil
Township II, north of Range 8, west
and that thereupon said lands We're
surveyed and returned as non mineral
tbs. character of said lands and all oil
them is conclusivelv determined tol
the purpose of this action, and the de-
fendant herein cannot be permitted tC
question said determination.
If you find that the plaintiffs entitled
to recover, you will award him al
compen atom for the Withholding of tn,
lands you so find he is entitled tt
recover, the reasonable value of the US,
and o, cupancy thereof, from the dat,
of his lease, August Z, 1885, until tn,
day of your verdict.